[bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description Protocols in 360 Degree Review

  • From: Scott Rains <scottr@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:33:48 -0700

LOL. We have been calling those images inserted as design elements "eye candy." 
I like "parsley" even better!


From: Judy Stouffer 
Reply-To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:25:16 -0700
To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" 
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description Protocols in 
360 Degree Review

I believe the image descriptions Scott is talking about are for NIMAC sourced 
textbooks. smile. So they're looking for descriptions for a totally different 
purpose, to make sure that information that's contained in the image and not in 
the text, is available to the student, and the description guidelines are 
related to that.

A lot of the images that are in the textbooks are just there to make a page of 
text 'prettier' to a sighted viewer, and aren't even really related to the 
text. It's sort of like adding a parsley garnish to a plate of food.  The 
parsley isn't intended for eating and doesn't add anything to the flavor, size, 
texture or smell of the meal.  It's totally optional and just there to draw a 
sighted person's eye to the plate and give a visual cue that sighted diners may 
find pleasant. smile.

Judy s.
Susan Lumpkin wrote:
Hi Lori,

I surely do hope you’re incorrect because, if so, several of us, both sighted 
and blind, have spent a great deal of time either describing or editing 
descriptions of pictures in detail in such things as figures in a history book 
or landscapes in a nonfiction work or especially pictures in Children's books!


Other related posts: